INSIGHT Vol 1= "Noahs grandson raped him while noah was drunk." What??

by Witness 007 12 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • Witness 007
    Witness 007

    Reding INSIGHT VOLUME on "Canaan" p.399-400 today I come across this unkown Watchtower theory...Noahs grandson Canaan sexually abused Noah while he was drunk! Firstly can I say....yuck, why would he...Noah was 580 years old!

    Gen 9;22 "The expression "saw his fathers nakedness" may indicate some ABUSE or PERVERSION that involved Canaan is a reasonable conclusion. So it is possible that Canaan had committed or attempted to commit some abuse on the unconscious Noah...." His father Ham did nothing about it and so was cursed.

    Gen 9;24 "Finally Noah awoke from his wine and got to know what his youngest son had DONE TO HIM." {vol 2 p.508} ""Youngest son may refer to Ham...sometimes refers to grandson..."


  • truthseekeriam

    I agree I was pretty freaked out and grossed out at the same time when I read that! I really think the bible should have a rating of PG-13.

  • doofdaddy

    So god couldn't find any people more righteous than this lot to save through the flood?

    Ermm, speaking of Lot, didn't he commit incest with god's blessing?

  • Balsam

    Its funny the assumptions they can draw from words that have been written over and over and translated over and over. To think uncovering nakedness means unquestionably rape. The WTS draws all their weird conclusions and expects everyone to fall in line with the stupidity of it all.


  • Witness 007
    Witness 007

    So Jehovah has poor judgement saving Noahs son, who's family was worse then those of Sodom and Gomorah...grandfather molesters?

  • truthsetsonefree




    Following the incident regarding Noah’s drunkenness, Canaan came under Noah’s prophetic curse foretelling that Canaan would become the slave of both Shem and Japheth. (Ge 9:20-27) Since the record mentions only that “Ham the father of Canaan saw his father’s nakedness and went telling it to his two brothers outside,” the question arises as to why Canaan rather than Ham became the object of the curse. Commenting on Genesis 9:24, which states that when Noah awoke from his wine he “got to know what his youngestson had done to him,” a footnote in Rotherham’s translation says: “Undoubtedly Canaan, and not Ham: Shem and Japheth, for their piety, are blessed; Canaan, for some unnamed baseness, is cursed; Ham, for his neglect, is neglected.” Similarly, a Jewish publication, ThePentateuchandHaftorahs, suggests that the brief narrative “refers to some abominable deed in which Canaan seems to have been implicated.” (Edited by J. H. Hertz, London, 1972, p. 34) And, after noting that the Hebrew word translated “son” in verse 24 may mean “grandson,” this source states: “The reference is evidently to Canaan.” TheSoncinoChumash also points out that some believe Canaan “indulged a perverted lust upon [Noah],” and that the expression “youngest son” refers to Canaan, who was the youngest son of Ham.—Edited by A. Cohen, London, 1956, p. 47.

    These views, of necessity, are conjectural since the Biblical record does not give any details as to Canaan’s implication in the offense against Noah. Yet some implication seems definitely intended by the fact that, just before relating the case of Noah’s drunkenness, Canaan is abruptly introduced into the account (Ge 9:18) and, in describing Ham’s actions, the record refers to him as “Ham the father of Canaan.” (Ge 9:22) That the expression “saw his father’s nakedness” may indicate some abuse or perversion that involved Canaan, is a reasonable conclusion. For in most instances incest or other sexual sins are meant when the Bible speaks of ‘laying bare’ or ‘seeing the nakedness’ of another. (Le 18:6-19; 20:17) So, it is possible that Canaan had committed or attempted to commit some abuse on the unconscious Noah and that Ham, though having knowledge of this, failed either to prevent it or to take disciplinary action against the offender, and compounded the wrong by making known to his brothers Noah’s disgrace.

  • truthsetsonefree

    You're so right Balsam. They can't just leave well enough alone. The "Jewish publication" referred to just suggests something "abominable". WT has to do their 'here is what that term means in some other part of the Bible' and over analyze the thing. They make so many mistakes that way.

  • gubberningbody

    I commented on this in my last Bible Highlights.

    I pointed out the fact that Canaan went to tell his brothers was indicative of either the lack of spiritual training received in internalizing moral matters at home or else he was a pervert and an idiot.

    This, I said is suggested by the fact that Canaan imagined his brothers would think it pretty funny what he'd done tho their father.

    How else would Canaan have thought that they might have thought it funny if his brothers hadn't indicated their level of morality around him while they were living and working together?

    I said, could it be possible that when the Bible says Noah did 'Just so', that he did the minimum?

    Could it be possible that when the Bible spoke of Noah as being "faultless among his contemporaries" that Noah was merely "faultless COMPARED to" the people in general living at that time?

    We never read of Noah trying to help his relatives, we never read of Noah as trying to instruct his family in moral matters, we never read of Noah pleading for the lives of the people who are going to be destroyed....

    We DO read of Abraham instructing his family, we DO read of his concern for those in Sodom and Gomorrah. The same could be said of Moses....

    NOT so of the man who did "just so".

    So perhaps this might seem a bit speculative to those of you here today, and perhaps it seems a bit critical of Noah - it's not intended to be or do that, but it IS intended to get your attention so that we understand that we CAN become so busy with "ark building" - in the preaching work, building kingdom halls, going to meetings and attending to congregational concerns that we can without even being aware of it, neglect teaching ourselves, teaching our family to really KNOW JEHOVAH on the INSIDE so serving him becomes merely a perfunctory business of "doing just so". If we understand and act on that, then though we may not be perfect, and surely we won't be, we will at least have been working on the REAL ark - the one we build w/our relationship w/Jehovah on the inside and as the inside gets built up, the outside will get constructed in natural fashion.

    Or words to that effect...

    I got a few squeemish looks from the other elders, but the KH sure was paying attention.

  • AllTimeJeff

    Just a few passing observations

    Genesis has more sexual activity going on in it then a brothel in Amsterdam. Lets just look at what is generally accepted when it comes to the account of Cannan and Ham.

    The bible does not specifically describe what Cannan did, in fact, it doesn't say it was Cannan. All of it is conjecture.

    Cannan and his entire race of descendents are condemned forever because of this. Later on in the allegorical history of Israel, the accursed Cannanites are singled out for genocide, targets of war because YHWH didn't like them too much.

    No ill comment is made as to Noah being fall down drunk.

    It seems that with respect to the people who believe this, few critically examine the reasonableness of this account, and the related cursing of an entire race of people.

    JW's for all of their super righteous stand on 'overindulgent' alcohol consumption lately (as Bethelites laugh their ass off) never really comment too much on Noah or Lot getting drunk, and the (supposed) bad events that followed the too drunk to walk men of faith.

    These stories must be weighed in their entirety, juxtaposed against the entire bible. To use these as "lessons", "prophetic patterns", "indications of gods thinking" is highly dangerous. JW's are a great example of this.

    Ham though, if this were true, would make a great elder handling pedophiles today. He did exactly what JW's tell the elders to do, as little as possible. (or as gubberningbody put it well, "just so".)

  • Witness 007
    Witness 007

    If the governing body says it's so it must be...they are sex maniacs those old virgins!

Share this